Notes from E-Marking Centre on HSSC-I Physics Annual Examinations 2025

Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Higher Secondary
School Certificate (HSSC) Part I Physics. It contains comments on candidates’ responses to
the 2025 HSSC-I Examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their
relative strengths and weaknesses.
E-Marking Notes
This includes overall comments on candidates’ performance on every question and some
specific examples of candidates’ responses that support the mentioned comments. Please note
that the descriptive comments represent an overall perception of the better and weaker
responses as gathered from the e-marking session. However, the candidates’ responses shared
in this document represent some specific example(s) of the mentioned comments.
Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the
Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) in a manner that requires candidates to respond by
integrating knowledge, understanding and application skills they have developed during study.
Candidates are advised to read and comprehend each question carefully before writing the
response to fulfill the demand of the question.
Candidates need to be aware that the marks allocated to the questions are related to the answer
space provided on the examination paper as a guide to the length of the required response. A
longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Candidates need to be familiar with the
command words in the SLOs, which contain terms commonly used in examination questions.
However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one
of the command words. Words such as ‘how’, ‘why’ or ‘what’ may also be used. It is imperative
to refer to the command word guide available on the AKU-EB website for understanding the
expectations of the command word.
General Observations
Overall, the students exhibited a strong conceptual grasp and analytical proficiency in core
topics such as power, thermodynamics, simple harmonic motion, and interference of light, with
most able to apply these concepts effectively in problem-solving. However, deeper conceptual
engagement, particularly in justifying assumptions and articulating derivations, would further
elevate the quality of responses.
Certain areas revealed persistent challenges, including Carnot engine, wave motion, escape
velocity, equation of continuity and artificial satellites, and weightlessness, where
misconceptions occasionally hindered precise solutions. For satellite motion, while students
grasped basic principles of orbital mechanics, many struggled to explain the apparent
weightlessness in satellites, indicating a need for deeper conceptual clarity rather than
mathematical difficulties. A notable observation was the need for students to more
systematically extract and interpret given data, alongside recognising the critical role of unit
consistency in validating results.
Note: Candidates’ responses shown in this report have not been corrected for grammar,
spelling, format, or information.
 DETAILED COMMENTS
Constructed Response Questions (CRQs)
Question No. 1
Question Text m1 m2
Show that F = G is dimensionally correct.
r2
SLO No. 1.6.2
SLO Text Show the homogeneity of physical equations by using dimensions and basic units.
Max Marks 03
Cognitive U*
Level
Checking 1 mark for obtaining L.H.S.
Hints 1 mark for substituting the value in the R.H.S.
1 mark for obtaining R.H.S with the same dimension
Overall The overall performance on this question was not satisfactory. A few of the candidates
Performance demonstrated a clear understanding of the question’s requirements, showcasing their
knowledge of homogeneity in dimension analysis.
Description of Better responses demonstrated clear, step-by-step dimensional analysis, correctly deriving
Better and equating the dimensions on both sides of the equation. Candidates systematically broke
Responses down each component correctly, identifying key dimensions like Force
(LHS as [MLT−2]) and Universal Gravitational constant (RHS with “G” as [M−1L3T−2],
their solutions featured explicit validation of dimensional consistency
[MLT−2] = [MLT−2]. These responses reflected deep conceptual understanding, precision
in calculations and attention to procedural rigor, key traits of high-quality answers.
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weaker responses treated physical constants as dimensionless [e.g., (G) is constant, so it
Weaker does not have any dimension] and made errors in dimensional equations, such as equating
Responses force (F) with incorrect units (M2L−2). These responses lacked proper derivation steps and
showed confusion between different physical quantities, resulting in invalid dimensional
comparison, e.g., [M]2[L]-2 = [M]2[L]−2. The solutions were fragmented, missing logical
connections between steps and failing to verify dimensional consistency.
 Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Preferred Pedagogy** Assessment Strategies

Achievement Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual [Link]
cognitive level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair, and Share
required (skills + • Knowledge Platform
concepts) videos
• Review past paper • Questioning
questions on the concept Technique (Socratic
• Utilise the resource guide approach)
for additional materials • Practical
Demonstration

** For description of each

Pedagogy, refer to
Annexure A
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are encouraged to focus on deriving dimensions step-by-step, especially for constants like G,
K, etc., and emphasise checking homogeneity.

• Break derivations into clear steps. Write dimensions, substitute, simplify, and verify.

• Use quick classroom exercises where students identify/ correct dimensional errors in sample solutions.
*K = Knowledge U = Understanding A = Application and other higher-order cognitive skills
 Question No. 2
Question Text In the head-to-tail rule, can vectors be placed in any order of succession? Justify your
answer.
SLO No. 2.2.1
SLO Text Explain the sum of vectors using the head-to-tail rule.
Max Marks 02
Cognitive U
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing YES only
Hints 1 mark for the correct justification
Overall The overall performance on this question was positive. However, some candidates
Performance struggled to understand the question’s requirements, resulting in less effective responses.
Description of Better responses exemplified an understanding of vector addition’s commutative property.
Better The candidates precisely stated the mathematical principle (A + B = B + A) and clearly
Responses explained that the order of addition does not affect the result.
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses incorrectly stated that vectors “cannot be placed in any order”, directly
Weaker contradicting the commutative property of vector addition. These responses typically
Responses show fragmented understanding; they mentioned relevant terms but failed to apply them
correctly. Many candidates missed key details and instead of mentioning the commutative
or associative law of vector addition, they used the definition of the head-to-tail rule.
Image of
Weaker
Responses

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Preferred Pedagogy Used Assessment Strategies

Achievement for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual [Link]
cognitive level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair, and Share
required (skills + concepts) • Knowledge Platform
• Review past paper videos
questions on the concept • Questioning
• Utilise the resource guide Technique (Socratic
for additional materials approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are encouraged to use visual aids like vector plotting software, like GeoGebra, to clarify the
concepts of vector addition while explaining the concept of vectors.

• Teachers must teach their students to read the question carefully and identify the demand of the
question.

Question No. 3
Question Text A projectile is thrown at an angle of 30o with a velocity of 100 m/s. Find its maximum
height.

(Note: Take the value of acceleration due to gravity ‘g’ as 10 m/s2.)

SLO No. 3.6.4
SLO Text Solve word problems related to the above relations (a, b and c).
Max Marks 03
Cognitive U
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing the correct formula
Hints 1 mark for substituting the correct values
1 mark for writing the correct answer
Overall The overall performance on this question was commendable. Candidates communicated
Performance the problem-solving process from given data to the final answer, reflecting a solid
understanding of projectile motion principles and effective application of their knowledge.
Their proficiency in pinpointing key factors in projectile motion highlights their strong
analytical skills.
Description of Better responses reflected candidates’ problem-solving skills using projectile motion
Better principles. The students correctly identified and utilised all essential parameters: initial
Responses velocity (100 m/s), launch angle (30°), and gravitational acceleration (10 m/s²). The
solution shows proper use of the maximum height formula (H = Vᵢ² sin² θ / 2g), with
accurate trigonometric calculation of sin² 30° = 0.25 and correct final computation
yielding 125 m.
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weaker responses attempted to solve for maximum height, but incorrectly applied the
Weaker horizontal range formula R = vi2 sin 2θ / g instead of the maximum height formula
Responses H = vi2 sin2 θ / 2g. Such responses also had calculation errors, including incorrect
substitution of values and improper handling of trigonometric functions.
 Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Preferred Pedagogy Used Assessment Strategies

Achievement for this SLO
• Identify the expectation • Story Board • Past paper questions
of command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual Resources [Link]
cognitive level • Think, Pair, and Share
• Identify necessary • Knowledge Platform
content required (skills + videos
concepts) • Questioning Technique
• Review past paper (Socratic approach)
questions on the concept • Practical Demonstration
• Utilise the resource guide
for additional materials
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers suggested that the motion of the projectile can be demonstrated and discussed its horizontal
and vertical motion separately, giving clear knowledge about the application of the gravitation force
and its role in the motion of a projectile.

• Teachers may connect the concept of projectile motion to practical applications and compare their
motion with the motion in the absence of air resistance.

• Teachers may engage their students in activities like launching projectiles at different heights, angles
and velocities.

• Teachers are encouraged to continue practicing and applying concepts in different contexts. This will
further enhance their mathematical approach towards problem-solving abilities and ensure continued
success in similar scenarios.
 Question No. 4
Question Text Astronauts feel weightlessness in the satellite orbiting the Earth.
State TWO reasons for this.
SLO No. 5.6.1
SLO Text Describe the reasons for weightlessness in artificial satellites.
Max Marks 02
Cognitive U
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing each highlighted statement (2 required)
Hints
Overall The overall performance on this question was unpromising. Many candidates were unable
Performance to explain that weightlessness results from free-fall conditions and the absence of normal
forces, and failed to use precise terms like “apparent weightlessness”.
Description of Better responses concisely captured the physics of orbital weightlessness through two
Better precise observations: (1) the satellite's free-fall condition and (2) the critical absence of
Responses contact forces on astronauts. These responses demonstrated a strong conceptual grasp by
highlighting both the kinematic state (free-fall) and its dynamical consequence (zero normal
force).
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weaker responses incorrectly stated that space lacks gravity, failing to recognise that
Weaker satellites orbit precisely because of Earth’s gravitational pull. The explanation mistakenly
Responses attributes weightlessness to the absence of gravity rather than understanding it as a result of
continuous free-fall motion. Additionally, the claim that “satellites do not have gravity”
reveals confusion about mass and gravitational fields. These errors demonstrated a
significant misunderstanding of Newton’s laws of motion and the basic principles
governing orbital mechanics. Some responses revealed persistent misconceptions,
particularly the incorrect notion that weightlessness occurs due to a lack of gravity in space,
rather than understanding it as a state of continuous acceleration under gravity’s influence.
The variation in responses highlights how orbital mechanics remains a challenging concept,
with some candidates developing sound Newtonian reasoning while others retain pre-
existing misunderstandings.
Image of
Weaker
Response
Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Pedagogy Used for that Assessment Strategies

Achievement SLO
• Identify the expectation • Story Board • Past paper questions
of command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual [Link]
cognitive level Resources
• Identify necessary • Think, Pair, and Share
content required (skills + • Knowledge Platform
concepts) videos
• Review past paper • Questioning Technique
questions on the concept (Socratic approach)
• Utilise the resource • Practical
guide for additional Demonstration
materials
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are advised to have more targeted demonstrations contrasting free-fall versus zero-gravity
scenarios, and clearer visualisations of orbital mechanics so that students can better reconcile this
important physics concept with their intuitive expectations.

• Teachers are suggested to focus on the force diagrams comparing Earth’s surface vs. orbit to visualise
the missing normal force.

• Implement peer teaching where students explain using only key terms: gravity, free-fall, and normal
force.

Question No. 5
Question Text In a juice factory, juice flows through a horizontal pipe with varying velocities at two ends.
At point 1, the velocity of the juice is 3 m/s and the pressure is 120000 Pa. At point 2, the
velocity of the juice is 7 m/s, find the pressure at point 2.
(Note: Assuming the density of the juice is 1050 kg/m3.)
SLO No. 6.2.3
SLO Text Solve word problems related to the equation of continuity.
Max Marks 03
Cognitive K
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing the correct formula
Hints 1 mark for the correct substitution
1 mark for the correct answer
Overall The cohort struggled in this question and was unable to demonstrate the problem-solving
Performance skills while applying Bernoulli’s equation to this fluid dynamics scenario, with some
correctly identifying and substituting all relevant parameters, velocity, pressure and density
to arrive at valid solutions. Their work consistently showed proper algebraic manipulation
and unit consistency, reflecting a solid grasp of the underlying physics principles.
 Description of Better responses exhibited strong problem-solving skills in applying Bernoulli’s equation
Better to fluid dynamics. The students properly established and solved the equation
Responses P1 + ½ ρv12 = P2 + ½ ρv22 for a horizontal pipe, systematically substituting the given
values (P1 = 120,000, v1 = 3 m/s, v2 = 7 m/s, ρ = 1050 kg/m3) and presenting clear algebraic
steps to determine P2. Such responses reflected a solid grasp of Bernoulli’s principle,
attention to unit consistency, and the ability to translate theoretical knowledge into precise
numerical solutions.
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weaker responses misapplied physics principles by incorrectly using the gas law
Weaker P1V1 = P2V2 instead of Bernoulli’s equation. The solution completely omitted the fluid’s
Responses density (ρ = 1050 kg/m³) and the critical ½ ρv2 kinetic energy terms, leading to an invalid
pressure calculation. The working confused volume (gas laws) with velocity (fluid
dynamics), demonstrating a failure to recognise Bernoulli’s equation as the proper
conservation of energy principle for incompressible flow. These errors reveal a deep
misunderstanding of both the problem’s requirements and the distinct physics governing
fluid motion versus gas behavior. A few responses revealed confusion between fluid flow
and gas law equations, incorrectly applying PV relationships.
Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Preferred Pedagogy Used Assessment Strategies

Achievement for this SLO
• Identify the expectation • Story Board • Past paper questions
of command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual [Link]
cognitive level Resources
• Identify necessary • Think, Pair, and Share
content required (skills + • Knowledge Platform
concepts) videos
• Review past paper • Questioning Technique
questions on the concept (Socratic approach)
• Utilise the resource guide • Practical Demonstration
for additional materials
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Encourage candidates to make an experimental setup to differentiate between fluid flow and gas
systems.

• Teachers can use weaker responses as exercises where students identify/ correct misapplied equations.

Question No. 6
Question Text The acceleration of a body vibrating on a smooth surface under an elastic restoring force
does not remain constant during its motion.
Explain your answer in terms of SHM and write the relevant mathematical expression.
SLO No. 7.1.1
SLO Text Derive an expression for the acceleration of a body vibrating under an elastic restoring force.
Max Marks 02
Cognitive U
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing each highlighted statement (2 required)
Hints
Overall The candidates’ overall performance on this question was generally satisfactory,
Performance demonstrating a sound grasp of the key features of simple harmonic motion (SHM).
However, some responses lacked clarity in their reasoning, offered weak justifications, and
used incorrect mathematical expressions.
Description of Better responses effectively demonstrated understanding of SHM principles by correctly
Better applying Hooke’s Law (F = - kx) and Newton’s second law (F = ma) to derive the
Responses relationship between acceleration and displacement (a ∝ -x). The students logically connect
varying displacement to non-constant acceleration, using proper mathematical notation and
clear reasoning.
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weak responses revealed a lack of understanding of acceleration under elastic restoring
Weaker force. Candidates often give vague explanations, mentioning unrelated factors like gravity
Responses or environmental conditions, instead of focusing on the key idea that acceleration varies
with displacement in simple harmonic motion. These responses also lacked the correct
mathematical expression, which is essential to explain why acceleration is not constant.
Some candidates included irrelevant formulas, like T = 2 L/g.
Image of
Weaker
Response
Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Preferred Pedagogy Used Assessment Strategies

Achievement for this SLO
• Identify the expectation • Story Board • Past paper questions
of command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual Resources [Link]
cognitive level • Think, Pair, and Share
• Identify necessary • Knowledge Platform
content required (skills videos
+ concepts) • Questioning Technique
• Review past paper (Socratic approach)
questions on the concept • Practical Demonstration
• Utilise the resource *K =
guide for additional
materials

Any Additional Suggestions:

Teachers are suggested to reinforce core concepts and include more practice questions that require linking
conceptual understanding with mathematical expressions.

Question No. 7
Question Text In the given diagram, one end of a string is attached to a tuning fork with a frequency of
120 Hz, while the other end of the string passes over a frictionless pulley and is connected
to a suspended mass M. The value of M is such that the standing wave pattern has four
loops. The length of the string from the tuning fork to the point where the string touches
the top of the pulley is 2.0 m.

2.0 m

Pulley Tuning Fork

a. Determine the wavelength of the standing wave.

b. Determine the speed of transverse waves along the string.
c. Explain the effect of increasing the number of loops on the velocity and frequency
of the standing waves
SLO No. 8.1.6
SLO Text Solve word problems using V = f λ.
Max Marks 03
Cognitive A
Level
Checking a. 1 mark for finding the correct wavelength
Hints b. 1 mark for finding the correct velocity
c. 1 mark for writing each highlighted statement
Overall The overall performance of the cohort on this question was not up to the mark. Some
Performance candidates demonstrated a solid understanding of standing waves, with most using the
correct formula to calculate the wavelength and speed of standing waves in a string and
applying that relation to explain the relationship between frequency, wavelength, and speed.
Description of Better responses reflected a strong understanding of both conceptual and mathematical
Better aspects of physics. Students applied relevant formulas, such as λ = 2L / n and v = f λ and
Responses carried out accurate calculations with proper units and logical steps. Their explanations are
well-reasoned and directly addressed the question, demonstrating an ability to connect
physical changes, such as increasing the number of loops, to their effects on wavelength,
frequency and velocity. These responses were also neatly presented and showed clarity in
both thought and expression.
Image of
Better
Response

Description of Weaker responses showed three key issues: (1) incorrect wavelength derivation (e.g., using
Weaker √λ = 2 instead of L = n λ / 2), (2) mathematical errors in wave speed calculations using
Responses V = f λ), and (3) misunderstanding loop-frequency relationships (claiming more loops
decrease frequency when they increase harmonic frequencies at fixed length). These errors
revealed fundamental gaps in applying wave equations and interpreting standing wave
behaviour.
Image of
Weaker
Response
Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Pedagogy Used for that Assessment Strategies

Achievement SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
taught at the relevant • Audio Visual [Link]
cognitive level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair, and Share
required (skills + • Knowledge Platform
concepts) videos
• Review past paper • Questioning Technique
questions on the concept (Socratic approach)
• Utilise the resource guide • Practical
for additional materials Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are encouraged to incorporate visual diagrams and animations of the production of stationary
waves in a string and pipe that is open from both ends and closed from one end during their classroom
teaching.

• Encourage students to make an experimental setup to demonstrate the formation of standing waves in
their physics laboratory.

• Teachers are suggested to practice with their students to pay attention to the wording of the question
can help avoid misunderstandings and enhance accuracy in future assessments.

• Teachers should enhance their students’ understanding of standing waves in both organ pipes and
strings by showing them animations and pictorial diagrams to better differentiate the formation of
standing waves in various scenarios.

Question No. 8
Question Text In Young’s double slit experiment, the distance between two consecutive fringes (y) is
affected by the separation between the slits (d).
Explain the given statement with the help of a mathematical formula.
SLO No. 9.2.5
SLO Text Derive a relation for fringe spacing and use the relation in solving word problems.
Max Marks 03
Cognitive U
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing the mathematical formula
Hints 1 mark for stating the relation between fringe distance and separation between slits
1 mark for explaining the above statement
Overall The overall performance on this question was encouraging, demonstrating a strong ability
Performance to identify the relation between slits separation (d) and fringe spacing (Y) in Young’s
double-slit experiment. Their adept recognition of the context, along with mathematical
expression, showcased a commendable understanding of the topic. Such well-attained
responses indicate a solid grasp of relevant concepts and principles.
Description of Better responses correctly applied Young’s double-slit interference fringe spacing formula
Better (y = λ L / d) and accurately explained the inverse relationship between slit separation (d)
Responses and fringe spacing (y). The students demonstrated a clear understanding of how changing
the slit separation affects the interference pattern, correctly stating that increasing (d)
decreases (y).
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses misunderstood the double-slit experiment by incorrectly stating slit
Weaker separation (d) is directly proportional to fringe spacing (y), when the correct relationship is
Responses inverse (y ∝ 1 / d). The candidates appeared confused between two key formulas, incorrectly
applying the angular maxima condition (d sin θ = n λ) instead of the fringe spacing formula
(y = λ L / d). This leads to the wrong conclusion that increasing slit separation increases
fringe spacing.
Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Achievement Preferred Pedagogy Assessment Strategies

Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is taught • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
at the relevant cognitive • Audio Visual [Link]
level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair and
required (skills + concepts) Share
• Review past paper questions • Knowledge
on the concept Platform videos
• Utilise the resource guide for • Questioning
additional materials Technique (Socratic
approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
 Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are encouraged to use simulation or animation to visually show interference patterns forming
from two coherent light sources. Some of the websites are also given in the subject-specific resource
guide to help students grasp the wave nature of light.

• Students are encouraged to thoroughly understand the question and identify the correct formulas for
interference of light and fringe spacing.

• Students should be guided by their teachers to provide appropriate application of relevant formulas,
which can support their development in this topic, resulting in more accurate responses in future
assessments.

Extended Response Questions (ERQs)

Extended response questions offered a choice between parts ‘a’ and ‘b’
Question No. 9a
Question Text A marathon runner weighing 60 kg runs up the stairs to the top of a 440 m tall building. If
he lifts himself to the top in 15 minutes, then what will be his average output power?
SLO No. 4.3.3
SLO Text Derive the formula of power in terms of force and velocity and use it in solving word
problems.
Max Marks 07
Cognitive A
Level
Checking 1 mark for each highlighted step (7 required)
Hints
Overall Most of the candidates attempted this part of the question and the overall performance
Performance indicates a strong conceptual grasp. Most candidates generally demonstrated a good
understanding of power calculations in this question, with most correctly identifying and
applying the fundamental relationship between work, time and power. These candidates
showed proficiency in connecting theoretical concepts to practical calculations while
maintaining appropriate unit consistency throughout their work.
Description of Better responses accurately demonstrated strong problem-solving skills in calculating
Better power, showcasing clear methodology and accurate calculations. The candidates correctly
Responses identified and substituted all given values (mass = 60 kg, height = 440 m, gravity = 10 m/s²,
time = 900 s) into the power formula P = m g h / t. The solution was well-structured, with
logical steps from data listing to final computation, including proper unit conversion
(minutes to seconds).
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses revealed several fundamental errors in calculating power. Candidates
Weaker incorrectly used the momentum formula (P = m v) instead of the correct power equation
Responses (P = m g h / t), demonstrating a critical misunderstanding of the required physical concept.
Such responses typically showed: (1) confusion between different physics formulas
(momentum vs. power), (2) arbitrary mathematical operations without a physical basis and
(3) failure to utilise given data appropriately (height, time). Some candidates faced
difficulties, particularly in distinguishing between different physical formulas and their
applications. A notable portion also neglected proper unit handling or failed to fully
contextualise their final answers. These patterns suggest that while most candidates have
grasped the core principles, some require additional support in formula selection and
dimensional analysis.
Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Achievement Preferred Pedagogy Assessment Strategies

Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is taught • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
at the relevant cognitive • Audio Visual [Link]
level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair, and
required (skills + concepts) Share
• Review past paper questions • Knowledge
on the concept Platform videos
• Utilise the resource guide for • Questioning
additional materials Technique (Socratic
approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

Teachers should encourage their students to predict and justify their choice of formula before solving problems
will deepen conceptual understanding and improve problem-solving accuracy.

Question No. 9b
Question Text The escape velocity from the Earth is about 11.2 km/s. Calculate the escape velocity from
Saturn, whose mass is about 100 times the Earth’s mass and radius is about 10 times the
Earth’s radius.
SLO No. 4.7.3
SLO Text Calculate escape velocity for the Moon and the Earth when the mass and radius of the bodies
are given and use this formula for solving word problems.
Max Marks 07
Cognitive A
Level
Checking 1 mark for each highlighted step (7 required)
Hints
Overall The overall performance of candidates on this question was not good. Only few of the
Performance candidates demonstrated proper understanding of gravitational concepts and maintained unit
consistency throughout their calculations. Their solutions showed logical problem-solving
by systematically substituting planetary parameters and simplifying the equations
accurately.
Description of Better responses exemplified a thorough and accurate solution for calculating Saturn’s
Better escape velocity, demonstrating strong problem-solving skills and attention to detail. The
Responses candidates correctly applied the escape velocity formula Vesc = (square root) 2 G M / R,
substituting Saturn’s given mass (100 times Earth’s mass) and radius (10 times Earth’s
radius) with precise values (M = 6 × 1026 kg, R = 6.4 × 107 m). The calculations were
meticulously executed, showing clear steps from dimensional analysis to the final
conversion of units (m/s to km/s).
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses typically showed an attempt to use the correct formula for escape velocity
Weaker but lacked clarity, structure, and proper reasoning. These responses often include
Responses mathematical steps without clear justification or explanation. Common issues include
incorrect or inconsistent use of units, poor handling of comparative values (like mass and
radius given in terms of the Earth), and skipping important steps in simplification. candidates
might also have failed to relate their work to known values, such as Earth’s escape velocity,
which could have made the process more efficient. These responses reflected a surface-level
understanding and lacked the logical flow and accuracy needed for a strong scientific answer.
Image of
Weaker
Response

Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Achievement Preferred Pedagogy Assessment Strategies

Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is taught • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
at the relevant cognitive • Audio Visual [Link]
level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair and
required (skills + concepts) Share
• Review past paper questions • Knowledge
on the concept Platform videos
• Utilise the resource guide for • Questioning
additional materials Technique (Socratic
approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

Teachers should focus on more targeted practice in distinguishing fundamental constants from variables and
reinforcing unit awareness in astrophysical calculations for improved performance of students.
 Question No. 10a
Question Text Two containers (A) and (B) are placed in a high-temperature reservoir. Container (A) is at
constant volume (Cv) and container (B) is at constant pressure (Cp).

Cp
Cv

A B
Show that the heat capacity at constant pressure (Cp) is greater than that of heat capacity at
constant volume (Cv).
SLO No. 10.6.3
SLO Text Show that Cp - Cv = R by using 1st law of thermodynamics.
Max Marks 07
Cognitive A
Level
Checking 1 mark for writing the formula of internal energy
Hints 1 mark for writing the mathematical form of the first law of thermodynamics
1 mark for comparing equations
1 mark substituting the values
1 mark for writing PV = RT
1 mark for obtaining the relation
1 mark explaining the relation (OR) writing
Overall Overall, most of the candidates attempted this part of the question. Most of the candidates
Performance demonstrated that Cp > Cv by properly accounting for the work done during expansion at
constant pressure, showing a clear understanding of thermodynamic principles. Their
solutions featured accurate derivations linking heat transfer, internal energy change, and work
done.
Description of Better responses demonstrated a clear understanding of thermodynamic principles and logical
Better derivation. They correctly applied the first law of thermodynamics at both constant volume
Responses and constant pressure, clearly distinguishing between conditions. These answers showed
proper algebraic substitution (using ΔU = C v ΔT), applied the ideal gas law effectively and
arrived accurately at the relationship Cp − Cv = R. Additionally, they explained the physical
meaning that at constant pressure, heat is used not only to increase internal energy but also
to do work, making Cp > Cv. The steps were well-organised, equations were clearly labeled,
and the conclusion was both mathematically and conceptually justified.
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses revealed significant conceptual misunderstandings in thermodynamics,

Weaker particularly regarding heat capacities at constant volume (Cv) and constant pressure (Cp).
Responses The candidates incorrectly manipulated equations, combining unrelated terms without
physical justification, and failed to derive the correct relationship (Cp > Cv). Such responses
indicated a lack of grasp of basic thermodynamic definitions and relationships. Weaker
responses revealed fundamental errors, including incorrect equation manipulation and failure
to distinguish between constant-pressure and constant-volume processes.
Image of
Weaker
Response
Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Achievement Preferred Pedagogy Assessment Strategies

Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is taught • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
at the relevant cognitive • Audio Visual [Link]
level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair, and
required (skills + concepts) Share
• Review past paper questions • Knowledge
on the concept Platform videos
• Utilise the resource guide for • Questioning
additional materials Technique (Socratic
approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

Teachers are advised to use visual aids like P-V diagrams to illustrate the work difference between these
processes could help bridge the gap between theory and application.

Question No. 10b

Question Text An inventor looking for financial support approaches you with an idea of an engine that runs
on a unique type of thermodynamic cycle. His design is made entirely of copper and is air-
cooled. He claims that the engine will be 88% efficient. Whereas the melting point of copper
is 1083oC and the exhaust temperature is 27oC.
Should you invest in this new engine? Why or why not? Justify your answer using
calculations.
SLO No. 10.9.3
SLO Text Derive the formula for the efficiency of the Carnot engine and use it in solving word
problems.
Max Marks 07
Cognitive A
Level
Checking 1 mark for each highlighted step (7 required)
Hints
Overall The overall performance on this question was not strong, with few candidates answering it
Performance correctly. demonstrated a clear understanding of the Carnot efficiency concept and applied
the formula accurately. responses included appropriate calculations, correct temperature
conversions, and well-justified conclusions.
Description of Better responses accurately applied the Carnot efficiency formula with correct temperature
Better conversions and clear steps to either calculate the required high temperature or the maximum
Responses possible efficiency using copper. They logically concluded that the claimed 88% efficiency is
unrealistic, either because it exceeds the limits of copper’s melting point or is mathematically
unachievable. These responses combined correct calculations with sound reasoning and often
suggest practical alternatives, such as using a higher melting point material. Overall, they
showed both scientific understanding and practical evaluation.
Image of
Better
Responses

Description of Weaker responses generally lacked proper application of the Carnot efficiency formula and
Weaker failed to approach the question systematically. The responses showed vague reasoning, with
Responses no clear use of the efficiency equation or relevant calculations. The candidates neither
converted temperatures correctly nor attempted to evaluate the claim quantitatively.
Conclusions were often based on guesswork or incomplete logic, without considering
physical constraints like copper’s melting point.
Image of
Weaker
Response
Suggestions for improvement (Highlight all that apply)

Maximising SLO Achievement Preferred Pedagogy Assessment Strategies

Used for this SLO
• Identify the expectation of • Story Board • Past paper questions
command words (use • Cause and Effect • Discussion on E-Marking Notes
Command Word Guide) • Fish and Bone • AKU-EB Digital Learning Solution
• Ensure the content is taught • Concept Mapping powered by Knowledge Platform
at the relevant cognitive • Audio Visual [Link]
level Resources
• Identify necessary content • Think, Pair and
required (skills + concepts) Share
• Review past paper questions • Knowledge
on the concept Platform videos
• Utilise the resource guide for • Questioning
additional materials Technique (Socratic
approach)
• Practical
Demonstration
Any Additional Suggestions:

• Teachers are encouraged to create similar practice questions to help students improve their problem-
solving skills and provide complete and accurate answers.

• Encouraging students to continue honing their problem-solving skills and ensuring precise application
of formulas and units will further enhance their performance in similar scenarios by providing them
with more practice questions from the past papers.

• Regular practice of problems related to the efficiency of heat engines will enhance students’ problem-
solving skills, leading to more accurate responses in similar situations.
 Annexure A: Pedagogies Used for Teaching the SLOs

Pedagogy: Storyboard
Description: A visual pedagogy that uses a series of illustrated panels to present a narrative,
encouraging creativity and critical thinking. It helps learners organise ideas, sequence events,
and comprehend complex concepts through storytelling.
Example: In a Literature class, students are tasked with creating storyboards to visually retell
a novel. They draw key scenes, write captions, and present their stories to the class, enhancing
their reading comprehension and fostering their imagination.

Pedagogy: Cause and Effect

Description: This pedagogy explores the relationships between actions and consequences. By
analysing cause-and-effect relationships, learners develop a deeper understanding of how
events are interconnected and how one action can lead to various outcomes.
Example: In a History class, students study the causes and effects of the Industrial Revolution.
They research and discuss how technological advancements in manufacturing led to significant
societal changes, such as urbanisation and labour reform movements.

Pedagogy: Fish and Bone

Description: A method that breaks down complex topics into main ideas (the fish) and
supporting details (the bones). This visual approach enhances comprehension by highlighting
essential concepts and their relevant explanations.
Example: During a Biology class on human anatomy, the teacher uses fish and bone techniques
to teach about the human skeletal system. The teacher presents the main components of the
human skeleton (fish) and elaborates on each bone’s structure and function (bones).

Pedagogy: Concept Mapping

Description: An effective way to visually represent relationships between ideas. Learners
create diagrams connecting key concepts, aiding in understanding the overall structure of a
subject and fostering retention.
Example: In a Psychology assignment, students use concept mapping to explore the various
theories of personality. They interlink different theories, such as Freud’s psychoanalysis, Jung’s
analytical psychology, and Bandura’s social-cognitive theory, to see how they relate to each
other.

Pedagogy: Audio Visual Resources

Description: Incorporating multimedia elements like videos, images, and audio into lessons.
This approach caters to different learning styles, making educational content more engaging
and memorable.
Example: In a General Science class, the teacher uses a documentary-style video to teach about
the solar system. The video includes stunning visual animations of the planets, interviews with
astronomers, and background music, enhancing students’ interest and understanding of space.

Pedagogy: Think, Pair, and Share

Description: A collaborative learning technique where students ponder a question or problem
individually, then discuss their thoughts in pairs or small groups before sharing with the entire
class. It fosters active participation, communication skills, and diverse perspectives.
Example: In a Literature in English class, the teacher poses a thought-provoking question
about a novel’s moral dilemma. Students first reflect individually, then pair up to exchange
their opinions, and finally participate in a lively class discussion to explore different
viewpoints.
Pedagogy: Questioning Technique (Socratic Approach)
Description: Based on Socratic dialogue, this method stimulates critical thinking by posing
thought-provoking questions. It encourages learners to explore ideas, justify their reasoning,
and discover knowledge through a process of inquiry.
Example: In an Ethics class, the instructor uses the Socratic approach to lead a discussion on
the meaning of justice. By asking a series of probing questions, the students engage in a deeper
exploration of ethical principles and societal values.

Pedagogy: Practical Demonstration

Description: A hands-on approach where learners observe real-life applications of theories or
skills. Practical demonstrations enhance comprehension, skill acquisition, and problem-solving
abilities by bridging theoretical concepts with real-world scenarios.
Example: In a Food and Nutrition class, the instructor demonstrates the proper technique for
filleting a fish. Students observe and then practice the skill themselves, learning the practical
application of knife skills and culinary precision.

(Note: The examples provided in this annexure serve as illustrations of various pedagogies. It
is important to understand that these pedagogies are versatile and can be applied across subjects
in numerous ways. Feel free to adapt and explore these techniques creatively to enhance
learning outcomes in your specific context.)
Acknowledgements
The Aga Khan University Examination Board (AKU-EB) acknowledges with gratitude the
invaluable contributions of all the dedicated individuals who have played a pivotal role in the
development of the Physics HSSC-I E-Marking Notes.
We extend our sincere appreciation to Mr Kashif Hussain, Manager, Curriculum Development
Department, at AKU-EB, for taking subject lead during the entire process of e-marking.
We particularly thank Mr Muhammad Salman, Lecturer, Habib Public High School, Karachi,
for evaluating each question’s performance, delineating strengths and weaknesses in
candidates’ responses, and highlighting instructional approaches along with recommendations
for better performance.
Additionally, we express our gratitude to the esteemed team of reviewers for their constructive
feedback on overall performance, better and weaker responses, and validating teaching
pedagogies, along with suggestions for improvement.
These contributors include:
• Zain Muluk, Manager, Examination Development, AKU-EB
• Munira Muhammad, Manager, Assessment Department, AKU-EB
• Dr Naveed Yousuf, CEO, AKU-EB